Because he's playing better, working harder, assisting more and scoring again.

Other than That, no improvement.

1 in 2 is generally considered a very good strike rate.

It's certainly not the 'minimum'.

His price has no relevance to how well he is or isn't doing.

exactly....he had that spell of not scoring and looking like he was struggling but he's improved and working harder his goal against Chelsea just what he needed and he needs one on Saturday or Tuesday, just hope he's fit as he seemed to be suffering a bit towards the end last night

Because he's playing better, working harder, assisting more and scoring again.

Other than That, no improvement.

1 in 2 is generally considered a very good strike rate.

It's certainly not the 'minimum'.

His price has no relevance to how well he is or isn't doing.

Playing better than what exactly? Has he improved as a player yes or no? I don't care if he is playing better than he was for that four month spell where he was complete shit including costing us the derby.

1 in 2 a very good strike rate? A 36 year old in a worse team managed the same amount of goals, there are wingers averaging almost a goal a game. The league is absolute shite, he is doing nothing special.

Playing better than what exactly? Has he improved as a player yes or no? I don't care if he is playing better than he was for that four month spell where he was complete shit including costing us the derby.

1 in 2 a very good strike rate? A 36 year old in a worse team managed the same amount of goals, there are wingers averaging almost a goal a game. The league is absolute shite, he is doing nothing special.

Yes he has.

Quote:

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

Not anymore. Otherwise Giroud would be seen as good enough to have taken Arsenal to the title. The top strikers look for two in every three. So for me 14 in 29 is the minimum I'd expect.

And his price tag and subsequent status is relevant. That money and his wages would get you most strikers. He/United has to justify it.

I tend to be far more critical of those out on the pitch tbf.

No. The top strikers in world football have that kind of record. And all in teams that score more and serve their strikers better.

There is a space between the absolute best and just reaching the bare minimum.

Giroud has been ditched after, What, four seasons? If Lukaku isn't better than 1 in 2 as a United player in four years, I'd be surprised.

The price has no bearing on how he plays, is my point. If we'd got him for cheaper, would his record be better then?

£75 wouldn't get you any of Kane, Aguero, Ronaldo or Messi.

Salah has done it for 2/3 of one season.

He's likely to hit 30 goals for the season. In a debut season where he's had a barren spell, playing In a side that is, at best, in transition.